From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin von Loewis To: jbuck@synopsys.com Cc: law@cygnus.com, rittle@comm.mot.com, egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: Implications of tighter integration of libg++ Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 15:33:00 -0000 Message-id: <199802092327.AAA04763@mira.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de> References: <199802091952.LAA11877@atrus.synopsys.com> X-SW-Source: 1998-02/msg00385.html > say "using namespace std;" as that imports all names. Rather, just > things like > > using std::istream; > using std::ostream; > using std::cin; > using std::cout; > using std::cerr; This does not solve the problem I'm talking about. With that scheme, and the implementation of namespace I have in mind, names would still come out as Q23std7istream, rather than 7istream as they do now. This is because the compiler would always resolve names to the place where they are actually introduced, regardless of any using and typedef magic applied. So, even if old sources would still compile, old objects would not link anymore. This is especially bad in presence of shared libraries which have to accomodate both sets of header files. Therefore, I think there is some value to the proposal of installing libg++ in the compiler-specific directories. Regards, Martin